Active Topics | Member List | Search | Help | Register | Login
The John Byrne Forum
Byrne Robotics > The John Byrne Forum
Topic: Mr. Fantastic (Topic Closed Topic Closed) Post ReplyPost New Topic
Author
Message
Kip Lewis
Byrne Robotics Member
Avatar

Joined: 01 March 2011
Posts: 2880
Posted: 14 February 2015 at 10:32pm | IP Logged | 1  

Got into a discussion recently about Reed Richards,
from the 60s, and from now. Something hit me, that I
had missed, at least consciously.

When Mr. Fantastic was created, he was, to use a
modern label, "the most interesting man on earth." He
was strong, decisive leader, a scientist at home in
the field as he was in the lab; he was an explorer,
and even an old style family man (That is, back then,
father's were not feeling men. Financial and social
provision was a man's work; not emotional support.
What we call cold, our fathers would call a good
provider.) He was a hero, even before the powers. He
was a successful soldier. He wasn't just a scientist
either; his motivation for the rocket launch wasn't
science, it was nationalism. He was a more well-
rounded man.

But somewhere over the years, Reed Richards, became a
distant father, indecisive, making errors, unable to
connect to people on an emotional level--probably on
Aspergers Syndrome Scale. And everything has become
about the science. Stories are written about him
reclaiming his family connections.

I'm trying to figure out when did this happened? I
read one online article that suggests it happened
because they removed WW2 from Reed's history. WW2 was
a baptism of fire that turned him into a scientist who
was also a hero. Without those years at war, he
remained simply an absent minded professor and that's
how people started writing him.
Back to Top profile | search
 
Matt Hawes
Byrne Robotics Member
Avatar

Joined: 16 April 2004
Location: United States
Posts: 16463
Posted: 15 February 2015 at 12:50am | IP Logged | 2  

What happened is that our society started tearing down heroes instead of looking up to them and aspiring to be them. Since too many people anymore are too cynical, lazy, and apathetic to better themselves, they detest those that are better and seek to tear them down.

Stan Lee made heroes people could relate to, but they were still meant to be heroes. They might fail on occasion, but nit for want of trying to do the right thing. When more writers took Stan's approach as to mean that heroes were fallible f**k-ups, missing the point behind what Stan was really doing, we got "heroes" who lie for self-gain, make deals with demons, kill, and manipulate others.

Vile, detestable, rotten sorts that are "heroes" in name only. Mostly due to being written by people who can't imagine anyone greater than themselves.

If you are the kind of person that thinks, "If I had powers, I would use them to get rich, or bed as many ladies as possible, or force my will on others, and I can't see writing anyone that is better than that" then you shouldn't be writing superheroes at all.

That's pretty much what happened to Reed Richards, and other heroes.
Back to Top profile | search | www
 
Kip Lewis
Byrne Robotics Member
Avatar

Joined: 01 March 2011
Posts: 2880
Posted: 15 February 2015 at 7:07am | IP Logged | 3  

I know the why, I an trying to figure out
when? I know it was after Byrne, after
Walt's short run. But it was before Civil
War. True, probably didn't happen all at
once.   

Edited by Kip Lewis on 15 February 2015 at 7:08am
Back to Top profile | search
 
Brian Hague
Byrne Robotics Member
Avatar

Joined: 14 November 2006
Posts: 8515
Posted: 15 February 2015 at 10:38am | IP Logged | 4  

I believe that the reason heroes have been torn down in recent years is because the values and ideals they once represented are no longer considered valid on a day-to-day, decision-by-decision basis in today's busy world. "Truth, Justice, and the American Way" are considered relative and difficult to apply in any sort of pragmatic sense. Today, you tell the truth if that's the best thing to say. If not, don't. People don't want to hear the truth. Are you in "Truths" or are you in "Sales?" If you're in "Sales," "Truths" should be left to the morons in that department. "Justice" is considered naive at best, laughable most of the time otherwise. "The American Way" is simply Capitalism. And Guns. You have those two things, you gots whut the resta' the whole damned wurld wished it had! 

All the rest of it as well goes along with that. You do not behave it a manner that benefits or is considerate of others any longer unless you are a sucker or a schmuck. Seriously, no one else is out there making the world any better for you. You don't owe anybody else a thing. Get your's. Get it any way you can, buy some property, go skiing. The rest of the world, collectively, and individually, can go kill itself. 

People today better themselves constantly. Fitness centers stay open 24 hours a day. College enrollment is not suffering. Wealth is hard fought for and readily available to those in the right positions. House flipping is taking place all around us. Healthy eating. Bicycling. People aren't that lazy, really. They're willing to work at these opportunities for self-improvement.

But the reasons they're out there doing these things is not to make the world a better place. If you think you can, you're kind of crazy, in the general opinion. If so, more power to you. Go save the whales. Go hug a rainforest. Good for you. If nothing else, you'll be getting the hell out of my way...

Heroes today who represent backwards, idiotic concepts such as altruism, selflessness, or Mankind fly in the face of what people today realize life is really all about; Kicking others in the teeth, purely in self-defense, because they were coming at you. They were just too damn slow to get in that all-important first shot. They had it coming, all right? It's called "Competition," and it's healthy. As long as you're not competing with me.

Heroes, or at least marketable, pop-culture entities serving as wish-fulfillment stand-ins, had better have something better going for them than happy thoughts and their heart on their sleeve. The fight has to be personal. They have to be willing to take it the edge and beyond. They have to be extreme. They have to be bad-ass.

Why? Because that's what the whole "I wish I were that person" thing is about today.

Somewhere along the line, Reed fell off the "person you want to be like" list and became a Complicated Character, someone Worthy of today's much, much, much better writers' attentions. The Hero who was all things to all people was deemed silly. What is interesting about the guy for today's audiences? What do we know about him? We know he spends too much time in the lab. We know Sue has to remind him to spend more time with his son. Well, there y'go! Right there! The guy's an asshole! A bad dad! THAT's what we can hang our hat on! Plus, he thinks he's all that and a bag of puppies! He's arrogant! Distant! Out of touch! You know who he is... He's Professor X! He's the Chief! He's someone who thinks he knows better than you do how to run your life! Guys like that... are the enemy. At least in fiction. In real life, in your middle management job, guys who fight guys like that are the enemy. They're insubordinate and should be fired. Just keep counting their mistakes. Everybody makes them. Just keep count. Meanwhile, back in the fictional world, Reed totally needs, as they once said on Buffy, "every square inch of his ass kicked." And Reed's ass can get pretty big, square-inch wise...


Edited by Brian Hague on 15 February 2015 at 11:08am
Back to Top profile | search e-mail
 
Brian Hague
Byrne Robotics Member
Avatar

Joined: 14 November 2006
Posts: 8515
Posted: 15 February 2015 at 11:00am | IP Logged | 5  

Specifically, the first time I recall Reed becoming something other than a hero was Claremont's "Fantastic Four Vs. the X-Men" mini-series in which, partly as an exploration of his deeper character and partly as a way to get him out of the way so the team's real star, the female member, had some maneuvering room, he was given a diary, supposedly written in his own hand, in which his younger self (see, asshole from day one!) jots down all of his expectations for his upcoming rocket experiment in which he fully plans to mutate his friends into super-beings. Or at least really cool lab experiments. 

Rather than simply investigating where the book really did originate, Claremont's Reed begins questioning himself. Sure, he doesn't remember writing it, but that doesn't mean he didn't... What if he did write it? Did he mean to turn Ben into a monster? Were Sue and Johnny's lives really that meaningless to him? How can he ever know? Who is he really?

Reed dissolves into a thumb-sucking, self-doubting loser. See also: Cyclops. He can't save Kitty from the condition that's killing her. He's can't save anyone. What if he tries to kill her? Or turn her into a frog for dissection? What if he really is a bad, bad mans...? Sob, blubber, blubber, sob...

Sue steps up. She knows her man. She knows the book's a fake. No doubts. No question. She's an angry mama lion defending her family and cubs as she tells Doom, the diary's true author, as he's... eating a caviar-covered cracker... at a party of some sort... Then she turns on her heel and smartly saunters off... Because the book's writing sucked on levels that cannot possibly be conveyed in mere words... The actual color-change in the face that accompanies the induced nausea as the events are recapped has to factor in, somehow...

In any case, not many authors followed Claremont's lead on the self-conflicted thumbsucker version of Reed, but it did raise a lot of previously-kept-to-fandom questions about what Reed knew and when did he know it.

Back to Top profile | search e-mail
 
Vinny Valenti
Byrne Robotics Member
Avatar

Joined: 17 April 2004
Location: United States
Posts: 8066
Posted: 15 February 2015 at 11:25am | IP Logged | 6  

"Claremont's Reed begins questioning himself. Sure, he doesn't
remember writing it, but that doesn't mean he didn't..."

And that there encapsulated the ridiculousness of the mini-series itself.
It's predicated on an impossible premise. Why the hell would Reed
think he may have written an opinion that he never professed to ever
having before?
Back to Top profile | search
 
Brian Hague
Byrne Robotics Member
Avatar

Joined: 14 November 2006
Posts: 8515
Posted: 15 February 2015 at 11:45am | IP Logged | 7  

As I recall, Claremont's story had it that as a fundamentally decent human being, a good man through and through, Reed's super-complex mind and ethical precepts would not allow him to dismiss, out-of-hand, the real possibility that he is, and always had been, in fact a very very evil man... Or something like that...

Back to Top profile | search e-mail
 
Brian O'Neill
Byrne Robotics Member
Avatar

Joined: 13 November 2013
Location: United States
Posts: 1964
Posted: 15 February 2015 at 11:57am | IP Logged | 8  

"Bad Claremont Story"?
Back to Top profile | search
 
Peter Martin
Byrne Robotics Member
Avatar

Joined: 17 March 2008
Location: Canada
Posts: 15876
Posted: 15 February 2015 at 12:11pm | IP Logged | 9  

Yeah, I never understood that FF vs X-Men idea that Reed could doubt whether he actually wrote the diary. Was his memory really that bad? Simply stupid.
Back to Top profile | search
 
Wallace Sellars
Byrne Robotics Member
Avatar

Joined: 01 May 2004
Location: United States
Posts: 17677
Posted: 15 February 2015 at 12:37pm | IP Logged | 10  

I never read the story you guys mention here, but do recall one by the
name of "Unthinkable" where Reed lost his ability to make team
decisions.
Back to Top profile | search | www
 
Jason Scott
Byrne Robotics Member
Avatar

Joined: 06 August 2012
Location: Scotland
Posts: 1167
Posted: 15 February 2015 at 3:15pm | IP Logged | 11  

What happened is that our society started tearing down heroes instead of looking up to them and aspiring to be them. Since too many people anymore are too cynical, lazy, and apathetic to better themselves, they detest those that are better and seek to tear them down.
------------------------------------------------------------ ------


You may be onto something there. As I was just thinking something similar recently when I read of people bashing Andrew Garfield's Spider-man because he was "too confident and sure of himself to be Peter Parker!" They then went on a big rant about how Maguire's Spider-man was more representative of young people today, that made me want to weep for the future of the next generation!

But getting back to Reed, yeah I think it was Civil War that did the most damage there. Though I find a lot of what Mark Millar does to be damaging to characters just for the sake of cheap shock value. But the Reed I grew up with certainly wouldn't have been creating a mind controlled clone of Thor.

I actually liked Claremont's take on Reed in X-men vrs Fantastic Four. (And indeed the rest of the team too.) There's maybe only one real moment where Reed does doubt himself over whether he actually did write the diary, and at the time he is very low and stressed out over the fall outs he had had with his family. So I can buy that he'd have that momentarily bit of doubt. The problems began when they started making that the de facto norm for the character.

P.S. Neat that my 444th post is one on a Fantastic Four character:-Couldn't have planned it better!
Back to Top profile | search
 
Eric Jansen
Byrne Robotics Member
Avatar

Joined: 27 October 2013
Location: United States
Posts: 2316
Posted: 16 February 2015 at 6:24am | IP Logged | 12  

This is one issue that I'm not going to blame on anything deeper than people have fallen into writing him as a stereotypical scientist type--unsure of himself, absent-minded, etc. The Lee/Kirby version was coming out of the 50's when scientists in sci fi movies were often heroic and played by hunky actors of the time. There was probably still the Doc Savage ideal in the public consciousness where the hero could have and do it all.

Over at DC, Superman no longer does science experiments in his Fortress at the North Pole and Batman hasn't deduced anything for decades. Everybody's becoming specialized and no longer multi-dimensional.

Edited by Eric Jansen on 16 February 2015 at 6:25am
Back to Top profile | search
 

Sorry, you can NOT post a reply.
This topic is closed.

  Post ReplyPost New Topic
Printable version Printable version

Forum Jump
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot create polls in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum

 Active Topics | Member List | Search | Help | Register | Login